It is the act of either waiting out the timer of an attack, or dropping a single trooper and then canceling the attack. This will cause you to lose the battle and thus lose medals.

Recently this has become a popular thing to do since medals influence your matchmaking and a lower amount of medals will match you up with either easy devbases or easier (slightly underleveled) live bases.

It's the result of a number of commanders (myself included) no longer finding enjoyment in attacking the exact same base layout over and over again with high risk for very low reward. (Box shape, Burst/rodians, rockets/sonics/sullustans)

Join the OuterRimRioters. Is what I would say, but we're almost full at the moment. A big happy family. If you are interested in joining you're more than welcome to drop by as long as we still have room.

Be careful though. Most squads select their war squad by medal ranking. If you have a low medal count it is assumed you are no good, and will therefore not be selected!

Medals are hard to earn, easy to lose!

Additionally, if your PvP is artificially easy you will likely not improve as a player, and will almost certainly get worse. Against a real base of similar strength, say in a war, you will learn to suffer!

Sandbagging is for wimps! Grow a pair and farm medals like you know you should. And besides, Zynga will likely fix the matchmaking to not depend on medals, which currently makes no sense whatsoever. You've been warned!

I would have to respectfully disagree that sandbagging is for wimps. It's a logical solution to both in game issues and also a solution to when we start a base vs. our opponents and why we start a base. I agree that you may not learn the attack skills you need and that Zynga could fix the current issues, which could mean issues down the road for extreme sandbaggers. There are some that choose sandbagging (mini base or medal dumping or some combination of both), simply because they like beating up on lessor opponents. However, I think more do it because of practical reasons.

Faction Imbalance Issues are one of them, dev bases, conflict points not always a fair reflection of risk/reward in conflicts, when a player starts (level 8 with 6 months of playing time has not had the same amount of time to collect frags and armory upgrades as a level 8 that has played for 2 to 4 years as an example), conflicts in general (only 2% really get rewarded in many conflicts thereby alienating 98% of the playing population who are casual players), etc.

I like my max base, but there are numerous reasons why I am also building mini bases and why medal dumping on some level makes sense.

ImperialDeathStar wrote:Be careful though. Most squads select their war squad by medal ranking. If you have a low medal count it is assumed you are no good, and will therefore not be selected!

Medals are hard to earn, easy to lose!

Additionally, if your PvP is artificially easy you will likely not improve as a player, and will almost certainly get worse. Against a real base of similar strength, say in a war, you will learn to suffer!

Sandbagging is for wimps! Grow a pair and farm medals like you know you should. And besides, Zynga will likely fix the matchmaking to not depend on medals, which currently makes no sense whatsoever. You've been warned!

Medals do not have anything to do with player skill...

I got 5,000+ medals in the last conflict (less than a week) by doing nothing this week... just defensive wins... the week before when I was grinding and the conflict before I got even more medals by skipping all player bases and hitting super easy dev bases!

ImperialDeathStar wrote:Be careful though. Most squads select their war squad by medal ranking. If you have a low medal count it is assumed you are no good, and will therefore not be selected!

Medals are hard to earn, easy to lose!

Additionally, if your PvP is artificially easy you will likely not improve as a player, and will almost certainly get worse. Against a real base of similar strength, say in a war, you will learn to suffer!

Sandbagging is for wimps! Grow a pair and farm medals like you know you should. And besides, Zynga will likely fix the matchmaking to not depend on medals, which currently makes no sense whatsoever. You've been warned!

I Totally agree.since getting my medals decimated in the great #medalgate scandal of Nov2018 I am now getting matched with Nooby nooby noob from the planet of the noob kings and it is fucking boring. Imo the OP should leave his squad and find a squad that wants to compete learn and improve his/her game not piss about dropping medals for an easy ride.

The short answer is dumping medals gets you better matchups or some can argue fairer matchups, depending on your situation. That said, here's the long answer and basics on medal dumping, and why some players do it. You will also see terms like sandbagging, mini bases, micro bases, etc. All methods of either leveling the playing field or gaining an advantage over your opponents, driven by various reasons like competing in conflicts, playing time considerations, what your base is for (main base vs. secondary base), etc. Weighing out why you play the game is critical. Is it the PvP challenge or the conflict challenge?

Important Note - The game changes drastically at level 8. Sandbagging allows you to level up, find out what it's like playing at level 8, and then add turrets and other base score altering structures while you learn and grow as a player. There's no undo button, so any base building mistakes you make at level 1 through 7, will stay with you at level 8 or higher.

Matchmaking PvP/H2H (Player vs Player aka Head to Head) or War Matchmaking:-----------------------------------------------------------------------At the heart of the current matchmaking issue, is matchups are based on defensive potential more so than offensive potential. Problematic at best, completely unfair at worst. Both PvP and War Matchmaking is based on base score, and PvP definitely factors in medal count. I am not sure to what degree medal count is factored into the war matchmaking algorithm. You will notice the opponent base score and medal levels to some degree, when you attack an opponent. Pay attention to their player rank, medals that you can earn or lose against them, and the related conflict points gain/loss vs. that opponent. You will see those numbers rise (low and high range) as your base score and medal count go up. You will see a corresponding drop, if you dump medals. There are other considerations, for example dev bases, that may muddy the waters. That said, you will notice the changes.

How Base Score and medals impact matchups:-----------------------------------------------------------------------There's a range of typical base scores, e.g. 400 for a level 4, 600 for a level 6, 2500 for a level 9, 2800 for a level 10, 3000+ for a level 11/Prestige. You typically get matched up with players of similar base scores and medal counts, but that is clouded by the opponent pool. If the matchmaking can't find a similar match, it may expand the matchmaking to higher or lower level opponents or go to a fallback solution using dev bases (developer bases, which are stripped down versions of cloned player bases). Medals work in a similar fashion, as the more medals you gain, the more the programming assumes you are skilled and/or have been playing for a long time.

Knowing this, you can game the matchmaking algorithm by either suppressing your base score and/or medal count or true up the matchmaking when you are encountering matchmaking algorithm flaws. Making it seem like you have a lower level base and/or are an inexperienced player. There are abuses there, so I get why some players complain about it, but there's also reasons why it makes more sense to use your knowledge to compete in conflicts and events. The work smarter not harder theory.

Base Score Chart ... See link (Somewhat outdated, but still applicable for the most part).viewtopic.php?t=18532

KSOD publishes squad and player rankings for all squads participating in wars. It gives you an idea of the base scores for players at your HQ level, and the sandbaggers will jump out. For example a base score of 400 would typically be more of a level 4-5 player, and you will see players at level 6 or higher with 400 level base scores.

Reasons why you might want to medal dump or use a mini base:-----------------------------------------------------------------------1) You want to compete in conflicts and events, but you also want to have a life beyond the game. Sandbagging either through some combination of mini base designs and medal dumping will allow you to compete with half the time and effort or less. This applies to lower level players as well as to higher level players who have so many medals, they only face maxed out bases, which can take them out of conflicts/events and also take some of the fun out of the game. There's very little fun in only being able to attack once every 2 hours or so, if you need to use the entire arsenal to win.

2) You are a first year player facing players who have played for 2 to 4 years or more. Players complain about sandbaggers but they don't consider how unfair it is to compete with players possessing armory levels way below theirs. It's just the flip side of the coin. Each armory level is worth slightly more than an HQ level, assuming each base is maxed out. A level 8 with a max level armory is like a level 11, so they are a level 11 beating up on level 8's or lower. Isn't that the same as a sandbagger with a level 8 HQ beating level 6 or 7 opponents? Not saying either situation is right, but I can't see how this is not basically the same. The players with maxed out armories grumbling about why players don't play by rules that favors them, makes no sense to me. My take is do what you need to do to compete, have fun, and hopefully both.

3) You enjoy winning and being able to use all your units. As you level up, you will find some units lose value. They become obsolete, because the game must naturally encourage crystal spending, which in turn means the game always needs to sell you the shiny new toy. If you like using wookiees and banthas, and other similar units, keeping your base score and medal count low, will allow you to mix and match based on fun vs. having to use specific units like jets/jumps, because that is what they game is forcing you to do at high levels because of the unit damage/health specs and conflicts and matchmaking algorithms.

4) You are setting up a third, fourth, fifth, etc. base, to help supply units to squad members or your main base, without messing up your main base transport load out. You want to compete in conflicts to gain special units, which require you to compete in conflicts and events. You can do so at a reasonable time cost, using a mini base or by dumping medals.

5) You are not getting enough defensive wins, not because your defense is not great, but because it's become too difficult for attackers on some planets. That means having to earn more attack wins, more time investment, etc. to complete in conflicts.

6) Dev bases. The dev bases are developer bases. There's no armory and no squad center troops. A majority of players feast on dev bases to compete in conflicts. I would prefer attacking real bases, even if they are lower level, since more than likely those bases are still better or more fun to attack than defenseless dev bases. I see some grumbling about dev bases, but way more regarding sandbaggers. Why? The same reasoning drives sandbagging as attacking dev bases. Competing in conflicts and events with a practical amount of time and effort, matchmaking flaws, faction imbalances, and smaller player pools at higher levels.

There's more, but it all comes down to how long you have been playing, if it's a primary vs. secondary base, how much of a time commitment you can make to the game, whether you want to compete in conflicts and events, your skill level, what you consider a level playing field, how much of an enjoyment you get from being able to use the full breath of units available, etc.

Info overload, but I hope this helps, since it's not a simple answer. I have five different reasons for just my five bases alone.

I recall seeing someone mention having events where players are given random units, where their opponents have the same. No armory, same base structures at the same levels, etc. In other words a real level playing field. I would add a prep window like wars, where the players be given 24 hours to set up their bases. In effect utilize only what they are given and use their knowledge of those units. This truly puts the emphasis on skills. Make the players pay a reasonable amount to compete. Say a dollar in crystals, so the developer makes some money, which they need to keep the game alive. Assuming 160,000 active players, that's $160K for the developers and a minimal cost for competing players. $52.00 per year if you compete in all 52 weekly events.

This would supplement the existing game play in PvP, so they would not lose that income source, but it would open up a true test of skills. It would also limit game play, so each player has an hour a day or X amount of attacks to earn offensive points. That means no edge for people who do not have a life beyond the game, and protection for people with OCD issues! lol.

Defensive layouts would need to weigh out design issues, and do it strategically, since you want to attract attackers to earn defensive points yet not lose because it's a bad layout. The added benefit is that players would then need to use all units in normal game play, to fully understand the pro's and con's of each, knowing they may encounter those units in these tournaments. A combination of that posters idea and non OP wars got me thinking about this, along with players who grumble about sandbaggers while having maxed out armories.

strawman3125 wrote: Medals do not have anything to do with player skill...

These days medals are easy to get and harder to lose!

What twisted logic! You must be a decent level to earn 5,000 medals in a week of defensive wins alone. You certainly won't be level 5, right? Of course medals are a measure of player skill! You know it, I know it.

And of course medals are harder to earn than lose. To earn those defensive wins you'll have spent time requesting troops for SC, and spent many months upgrading your base and perfecting its layout! To lose medals you just have to fail, not succeed!

Last edited by ImperialDeathStar on Thu Jan 10, 2019 12:01 am, edited 2 times in total.